An Inconvenient Truth

Life, the universe, and everything.
Forum rules
- No personal attacks against players or staff members - please be civil!
- No posting of mature images/links, keep content SFW. If it's NSFW, don't post it on these forums.
teflor the ranger
Sojourner
Posts: 3923
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Waterdeep

An Inconvenient Truth

Postby teflor the ranger » Fri Apr 18, 2008 7:11 am

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1208475 ... lenews_wsj

"Either the young Illinois Senator is ignorant of this revenue data, or he doesn't really care because he's a true income redistributionist who prefers high tax rates as a matter of ideological dogma regardless of the revenue consequences. Neither one is a recommendation for President."
Teflor does. Teflor does not.
Ragorn
Sojourner
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby Ragorn » Fri Apr 18, 2008 11:36 am

I wondered how long it would take after Rupert bought the WSJ.
- Ragorn
Shar: Leave the moaning to the people who have real issues to moan about like rangers or newbies.
Corth: Go ask out a chick that doesn't wiggle her poon in people's faces for a living.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby Sarvis » Fri Apr 18, 2008 12:33 pm

Wow, they're really stretching for this. He's going to lower income taxes for the middle class, but they're trying to spin it as raising taxes because he's going to raise the capital gains tax? Sorry, but while the ridiculously high number of $200,000k/year somehow includes middle class... that capital gains tax is going to be far, far more on the upper class who really own, and derive large portions of their income from, stocks and investments.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby Corth » Fri Apr 18, 2008 1:52 pm

In 2005, 47% of all tax returns reporting capital gains were from households with incomes below $50,000, and 79% came from households with incomes below $100,000.
Having said all that, the situation has been handled, so this thread is pretty much at an end. -Kossuth

Goddamned slippery mage.
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby Corth » Fri Apr 18, 2008 1:57 pm

Ragorn wrote:I wondered how long it would take after Rupert bought the WSJ.


The WSJ was right leaning for decades before Rupert purchased it. Shrug.
Having said all that, the situation has been handled, so this thread is pretty much at an end. -Kossuth



Goddamned slippery mage.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby Sarvis » Fri Apr 18, 2008 2:27 pm

Corth wrote:
In 2005, 47% of all tax returns reporting capital gains were from households with incomes below $50,000, and 79% came from households with incomes below $100,000.



What? Did you expect me to read the entire article? Sheesh.

Really though, something seems suspicious about those numbers. I guess you have to account for people selling their houses and such, and people were doing a lot of "flipping" at that time right? Why 2005, anyway? Why not 2007 or 2006? Why not an average over 10-20 years?

It makes me feel like there was a spike in middle class capital gains taxes in 2005, and WSJ found that to use for this article...
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby Corth » Fri Apr 18, 2008 3:21 pm

Not many people pay capital gains on the sale of their residence. If you have lived there 2 of the past 5 years you get to exclude $250,000 in gains. If you are married, you get to exclude $500,000 in gains. Considering that people move on average every 7 years, in most parts of the country the capital gains exclusion far exceeds the gains that most people realize on the sale of their home.

Flippers certainly are subject to capital gains on the proceeds of their flip. I agree that the real estate frenzy from 2002 through 2006 probably broadened the tax base. Remember, however, that the statistic I quoted from the WSJ article is referring to people earning less than 100k. Most flippers, during the boom, made a whole lot more than that. Of course, nowadays they are filing for bankruptcy, but thats neither here nor there. Overall, I think that your point is probably valid to some extent.

Also, Sarvis, that statisitic I quoted is for the number of tax returns showing capital gains. Its doesn't reflect capital gains paid. I am sure that those who make the top 10% of income have a disproportionate share of the total capital gains tax burden as well. That would tend to validate your position somewhat that a capital gains tax increase is aimed at the wealthy rather than the middle class.

Its interesting to me that the net revenue from capital gains taxes tend to increase when the tax rate is lower, and decrease when the tax rate is higher. I think its a combination of things. First, people probably hold off on selling appreciated assets until the capital gains tax is decreased. Thus, you see a bit of a boom is asset sales when the tax is lowered. When the tax is high, people hold on to their assets rather than sell them. That would tend to undermine the WSJ position. Why? Because if the capital gains tax were to be kept high for a prolonged period, eventually people would be forced to throw in the towel and accede to the higher tax. But on the other hand, when investors are not burdened by a capital gains tax, they are more likely to allocate capital in a more efficient manner, which is good for the economy, and ultimately results in more capital gains revenue.
Having said all that, the situation has been handled, so this thread is pretty much at an end. -Kossuth



Goddamned slippery mage.
Lathander
Staff Member - Areas
Posts: 781
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 9:18 pm

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby Lathander » Sat Apr 19, 2008 12:48 am

One thing not mentioned is that starting this year, people in low income brackets actually pay 0 capital gains taxes. A good number of people get stock options and restricted stock in their companies which results in capital gains.
Lathander
Staff Member - Areas
Posts: 781
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 9:18 pm

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby Lathander » Sun Apr 20, 2008 1:42 am

From Newsweek:

"In 1980, households had half their financial assets in bank deposits and savings accounts; only 34 percent were in stocks and a meager 2 percent in mutual funds. Since then, Americans have diversified: in 2006, 25 percent of household assets were in mutual funds, 28 percent in stocks and 28 percent in bank deposits and savings accounts (the rest were scattered across bonds and money-market funds)."

The key here is the middle class is in capital gain securities now. They are the ones that benefit from low taxes, and I suspect someone raising those taxes now will be in trouble. Also, the regular tax system isn't really all that important once you get to 100 to 150K. Alternative minimum tax kicks in at that point up to about 450K although the base capital gains tax does affect AMT.
teflor the ranger
Sojourner
Posts: 3923
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Waterdeep

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby teflor the ranger » Sun Apr 20, 2008 6:34 pm

The inconvenient truth is that Obama runs on a platform of change when he doesn't even know what he's currently standing on. It shows at every important junction of his campaign. In the previous thread about the democratic primaries, I had indicated that Obama's website and campaign speeches said very, very little about what his actual plans were. The truth is that he doesn't have any, and the ones that he is slowly beginning to leak out to the public are fraught with poor information, blatant ignorance in some cases, and Stink of direction from new non-traditional interest groups.

He wants to raise your taxes.

Captial gains are the primary method of income for retired seniors and an important avenue for the affluent middle and upper middle class.

He wants to take your money and tell you how it should be spent.

Obama believes that the government should have more control over you and your life. Governments do not provide services that they do not control.

Obama believes that government should control your health care.

Why else would a government provide you an essential service unless it wishes to control it? When the government controls things you need, it controls you. Healthcare is provided to the citizens of the United Kingdom (England), where the government will tell you how much weight you need to lose before it will help you.

If you think your insurance company is bad, wait until the government gets its hands on you. Just ask the Gulf War Syndrome veterans.
Teflor does. Teflor does not.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby Sarvis » Sun Apr 20, 2008 7:18 pm

teflor the ranger wrote: ...direction from new non-traditional interest groups.


What? Groups other than old white Christians might have representation?

OH MY GOD NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! The HORROR!




Well, anyway... if good 'ole Teffie is anything to go by, I think the Republicans are scared of Obama. The disinformation campaigns are starting early...
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
Ragorn
Sojourner
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby Ragorn » Sun Apr 20, 2008 9:15 pm

teflor the ranger wrote:He wants to raise your taxes.
He wants to take your money and tell you how it should be spent.
Obama believes that government should control your health care.

Yes.

This is why I'm voting for him.

Thank you for restating his platform.
- Ragorn
Shar: Leave the moaning to the people who have real issues to moan about like rangers or newbies.
Corth: Go ask out a chick that doesn't wiggle her poon in people's faces for a living.
Lathander
Staff Member - Areas
Posts: 781
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 9:18 pm

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby Lathander » Mon Apr 21, 2008 2:39 am

I didn't know you were a socialist, ragorn?
teflor the ranger
Sojourner
Posts: 3923
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Waterdeep

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby teflor the ranger » Mon Apr 21, 2008 6:10 am

Ragorn wrote:
teflor the ranger wrote:He wants to raise your taxes.
He wants to take your money and tell you how it should be spent.
Obama believes that government should control your health care.

Yes.

This is why I'm voting for him.

Thank you for restating his platform.


You are welcome.
Teflor does. Teflor does not.
teflor the ranger
Sojourner
Posts: 3923
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Waterdeep

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby teflor the ranger » Mon Apr 21, 2008 6:13 am

Sarvis wrote:I think the Republicans are scared of Obama. The disinformation campaigns are starting early...


Sarvis, Republicans are always sacred of socialists. The disinformation campaign is Obama's.
Teflor does. Teflor does not.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby Sarvis » Mon Apr 21, 2008 12:26 pm

teflor the ranger wrote:
Sarvis wrote:I think the Republicans are scared of Obama. The disinformation campaigns are starting early...


Sarvis, Republicans are always sacred of socialists. The disinformation campaign is Obama's.



Don't you just love those Freudian slips?
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
Gormal
Sojourner
Posts: 3917
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2001 6:01 am
Location: A Whale's Vagina
Contact:

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby Gormal » Mon Apr 21, 2008 1:21 pm

Whoever wins this electon, America loses.
Ragorn
Sojourner
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby Ragorn » Mon Apr 21, 2008 1:53 pm

Lathander wrote:I didn't know you were a socialist, ragorn?

Then you don't know me very well. I also don't respond to silly republicans trying to slap hyperbolic labels on me, whether it's "socialist" now, "liberal" in the 80s, or "communist" in the 50s.

I very strongly support the idea of my tax dollars (and yours) being spent on social programs. And I can't tell you enough how supportive I am of raising taxes to pay down our debt on the Iraq war. You in 2004 for the guy who pledged to keep us locked down in this struggle, so I have a difficult time grasping why you flinch when it comes time to pay the bill. Personal, social, and fiscal responsibility, the Republican party could use a little more of all three lately. You don't get to bomb people for eight years and then send the bill to our kids. We are not going to allow you to do that, sorry.
- Ragorn
Shar: Leave the moaning to the people who have real issues to moan about like rangers or newbies.
Corth: Go ask out a chick that doesn't wiggle her poon in people's faces for a living.
Lathander
Staff Member - Areas
Posts: 781
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 9:18 pm

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby Lathander » Mon Apr 21, 2008 3:18 pm

As a percentage of GDP, our debt is not that big. The GDP has done well because we have had lower taxes. It's amazing how people work harder when they get to keep more of their own money.

The only reason Dem's want to raise taxes is to institute more socialism in our society. This just leads to a greater dependency to the government. Just look at the failure of the Great Society. I have enough faith in Americans to not allow the socialists in our midsts to take over our health care system or create more welfare programs that keep the poor down.

I really don't like McCain, but I think he might actually win because Obama is going the wrong way on things. He was an agent of change, but now, he just looks like another retread of an extremist liberal. I can't wait to see the Jeremiah Wright commercials!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9hPR5jnjtLo

I'll go ahead and put you in the "God Damn America" column.
Ragorn
Sojourner
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby Ragorn » Mon Apr 21, 2008 3:50 pm

Lathander wrote:The only reason Dem's want to raise taxes is to institute more socialism in our society.

Socialism is a republican buzzword. It doesn't mean what you think it means. Of course, "personal responsibility" to a republican just means "if you aren't rich, you aren't working hard enough."
- Ragorn
Shar: Leave the moaning to the people who have real issues to moan about like rangers or newbies.
Corth: Go ask out a chick that doesn't wiggle her poon in people's faces for a living.
Lathander
Staff Member - Areas
Posts: 781
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 9:18 pm

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby Lathander » Mon Apr 21, 2008 4:05 pm

Let me explain what socialism is. Basically, property and wealth are distributed by collectives and/or the government. If you are a socialist, you believe that individual rights to property are subordinate to the collective. Venezuela is a good example of socialism being imposed on a country. The government takes over capital and wealth through eminent domain and high taxes in order give create a utopian worker paradise. Of course, this paradise is an illusion leading to a stagnant economy and rationing. Socialism is also called the Prosperity Killer.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby Sarvis » Mon Apr 21, 2008 4:12 pm

Lathander wrote:Let me explain what socialism is.


I lol'd.


The government takes over capital and wealth through eminent domain


Ah, so <a href="http://www.propertyrightsresearch.org/2004/articles3/bush_and_eminent_domain.htm">President Bush is a Socialist</a>.

Thanks for clearing that up.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
Lathander
Staff Member - Areas
Posts: 781
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 9:18 pm

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby Lathander » Mon Apr 21, 2008 4:16 pm

I'd argue he used a socialist system to get something he wanted to make a buck. Calling Bush a socialist is a pretty big stretch.
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby Corth » Mon Apr 21, 2008 4:46 pm

Teflor is the true socialist here. I don't have the time to dig up all of the posts where he argued for radically increasing government involvement in social issues.

I'm not sure if this violates the rule of 'no personal attacks'. I think Teflor would consider it a personal attack, but then again a lot of people here might consider it a compliment. Hrmmm..
Having said all that, the situation has been handled, so this thread is pretty much at an end. -Kossuth



Goddamned slippery mage.
Ragorn
Sojourner
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby Ragorn » Mon Apr 21, 2008 4:48 pm

Lathander wrote:Let me explain what socialism is. Basically, property and wealth are distributed by collectives and/or the government. If you are a socialist, you believe that individual rights to property are subordinate to the collective. Venezuela is a good example of socialism being imposed on a country. The government takes over capital and wealth through eminent domain and high taxes in order give create a utopian worker paradise. Of course, this paradise is an illusion leading to a stagnant economy and rationing. Socialism is also called the Prosperity Killer.

Please explain for us how Obama's health care plan is in any way relevant to the definition you just posted.
- Ragorn
Shar: Leave the moaning to the people who have real issues to moan about like rangers or newbies.
Corth: Go ask out a chick that doesn't wiggle her poon in people's faces for a living.
Lathander
Staff Member - Areas
Posts: 781
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 9:18 pm

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby Lathander » Mon Apr 21, 2008 5:12 pm

Sure, Obama's health care plan would socialize the health care system. He would bring it under government control to lower costs within the system. This would mean a few things. First, health care workers would have to be forced to recieve lower wages. Doctors and nurses here in the States make more than those in socialized systems. Second, Obama and the Dems would use the government's power to mandate what the drug and other medical supply companies could charge. This would be similar to how states control the regulated side of the utility industry. Third, they would reallocate where the health care resources were. In areas with too much health care, they would be reduced and forced to go to underserved areas. Finally, the government, not you and your doctor, would determine your choices of health care procedures. Advanced medical procedures would be thrown out as too expensive just as they are in socialized health systems that currently exist.

In a nutshell, doctors and nurses would be seen as resources and controlled by the government. The same would apply to hospitals and other health care facilities like nursing homes. This is all bad, and can only be afforded by raising taxes and making private health care plans undesirable because that benefit would be taxed. We already see the government trying to steer people into governement mandated programs with the failed attempt at expanding the Child Health Insurance Program. Keep in mind, in some states, more adults are in the program than kids.

Obama's plan would technically be even worse than Clinton or Edwards' plans. At least, they admitted the higher costs. In Obama's, as a gimmie to the younger people, people would not have to belong to the mandated health care plan. They would be allowed to join it when they needed it. In other words, you would have a severe case of adverse selection. This problem would also have to be solved by higher taxes because you don't have regular premiums going in to fund it.
Ragorn
Sojourner
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby Ragorn » Mon Apr 21, 2008 6:09 pm

Lathander wrote:First, health care workers would have to be forced to recieve lower wages. Doctors and nurses here in the States make more than those in socialized systems. Second, Obama and the Dems would use the government's power to mandate what the drug and other medical supply companies could charge. This would be similar to how states control the regulated side of the utility industry. Third, they would reallocate where the health care resources were. In areas with too much health care, they would be reduced and forced to go to underserved areas. Finally, the government, not you and your doctor, would determine your choices of health care procedures. Advanced medical procedures would be thrown out as too expensive just as they are in socialized health systems that currently exist.

If any of that were actually true, I'd be against it too.

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/healthcare/

You should have another look at exactly what is being proposed.
- Ragorn
Shar: Leave the moaning to the people who have real issues to moan about like rangers or newbies.
Corth: Go ask out a chick that doesn't wiggle her poon in people's faces for a living.
Adriorn Darkcloak
Sojourner
Posts: 1292
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 7:11 pm
Location: Miami, FL

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby Adriorn Darkcloak » Mon Apr 21, 2008 10:12 pm

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that's what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. 'Since you are all such good customers, he said, 'I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20. Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. What happens to the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?' They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.

And so:

The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).
The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.

'I only got a dollar out of the $20,'declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,' but he got $10!'

'Yeah, that's right,' exclaimed the fifth man. 'I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I!'

'That's true!!' shouted the seventh man. 'Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!'

'Wait a minute,' yelled the first four men in unison. 'We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!'

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important.

They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
"There is one big rule in life - the things you worry about never happen, and the things that happen are never the ones you expect." - John Bellairs
Lathander
Staff Member - Areas
Posts: 781
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 9:18 pm

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby Lathander » Tue Apr 22, 2008 12:25 am

Amen Adriorn!

The Obama piece is nicely written, but extremely light on actual facts. No where does it talk about funding this welfare program other than some mythical cost savings from technology upgrades. On the cost savings front, it is also light with just talk about technology. On those, I sincerely doubt you'd see much saving from upgrading technology.
Kifle
Sojourner
Posts: 3830
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Huntington, IN USA
Contact:

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby Kifle » Tue Apr 22, 2008 12:31 am

Lathander wrote:Amen Adriorn!

The Obama piece is nicely written, but extremely light on actual facts. No where does it talk about funding this welfare program other than some mythical cost savings from technology upgrades. On the cost savings front, it is also light with just talk about technology. On those, I sincerely doubt you'd see much saving from upgrading technology.


They could just fund it with .0000001% of what we spend on the war per year. But that would mean actually using our tax dollars to promote life rather than needlessly take it for reasons that seem to change when the last is found to be complete bullshit.
Fotex group-says 'Behold! penis!'

Kifle puts on his robe and wizard hat.

Thalidyrr tells you 'Yeah, you know, getting it like a jackhammer wears you out.'

Teflor "You can beat a tank with a shovel!!1!1!!one!!1!uno!!"
Lathander
Staff Member - Areas
Posts: 781
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 9:18 pm

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby Lathander » Tue Apr 22, 2008 12:33 am

I guess we're all just bitter little people like Obama says?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNJAl8a3 ... re=related

It's so damn funny! Dems have managed to nominate a guy that is more out of touch than John Kerry was.
Lathander
Staff Member - Areas
Posts: 781
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 9:18 pm

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby Lathander » Tue Apr 22, 2008 12:43 am

Barack getting us out of Iraq?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yzy3lObi ... re=related

Please, a Dem is less able to get us out of Iraq than a Republican. Each party has certain things they can and can't do. Dems can get things through for Stem Cell Research and Abortion. Republicans can get out of military trouble like Nixon with Vietnam when Johnson couldn't. See if a Dem gets us out, they will be painted as weak because they are naturally bad on defense and national security.
teflor the ranger
Sojourner
Posts: 3923
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Waterdeep

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby teflor the ranger » Tue Apr 22, 2008 1:03 am

Sarvis wrote:
teflor the ranger wrote:
Sarvis wrote:I think the Republicans are scared of Obama. The disinformation campaigns are starting early...


Sarvis, Republicans are always sacred of socialists. The disinformation campaign is Obama's.



Don't you just love those Freudian slips?


That might have worked had it been spoken, rather than typo'd. But you are that disconnected from reality, so I won't hold it against you.
Teflor does. Teflor does not.
teflor the ranger
Sojourner
Posts: 3923
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Waterdeep

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby teflor the ranger » Tue Apr 22, 2008 1:04 am

Corth wrote:Teflor is the true socialist here. I don't have the time to dig up all of the posts where he argued for radically increasing government involvement in social issues.

I'm not sure if this violates the rule of 'no personal attacks'. I think Teflor would consider it a personal attack, but then again a lot of people here might consider it a compliment. Hrmmm..


Ho ho, Corth. Properly enforcing currently existing legislation is not an increase in government involvement. Just the expectation that the government uses the power it has correctly.
Teflor does. Teflor does not.
Kifle
Sojourner
Posts: 3830
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Huntington, IN USA
Contact:

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby Kifle » Tue Apr 22, 2008 2:04 am

teflor the ranger wrote:
Sarvis wrote:Don't you just love those Freudian slips?


That might have worked had it been spoken, rather than typo'd. But you are that disconnected from reality, so I won't hold it against you.


Freudian slips can occur through writing as well as spoken word. But you'd know that if you'd have actually studied Freud past what Psych 101 text books and wikipedia might say, so I wont hold it against you.
Fotex group-says 'Behold! penis!'

Kifle puts on his robe and wizard hat.

Thalidyrr tells you 'Yeah, you know, getting it like a jackhammer wears you out.'

Teflor "You can beat a tank with a shovel!!1!1!!one!!1!uno!!"
teflor the ranger
Sojourner
Posts: 3923
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Waterdeep

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby teflor the ranger » Tue Apr 22, 2008 4:26 am

Kifle wrote:
teflor the ranger wrote:
Sarvis wrote:Don't you just love those Freudian slips?


That might have worked had it been spoken, rather than typo'd. But you are that disconnected from reality, so I won't hold it against you.


Freudian slips can occur through writing as well as spoken word. But you'd know that if you'd have actually studied Freud past what Psych 101 text books and wikipedia might say, so I wont hold it against you.


I did. Typoes are common enough that it's not unusual that they're disconnected entirely with thoughts and the subconscious, unless you're going to tell me that "teh" is a freudian slip. You'd know that if you'd have actually studied psychology past the 101 level.

I won't hold it against you either.
Teflor does. Teflor does not.
Kifle
Sojourner
Posts: 3830
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Huntington, IN USA
Contact:

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby Kifle » Tue Apr 22, 2008 9:43 am

teflor the ranger wrote:I did. Typoes are common enough that it's not unusual that they're disconnected entirely with thoughts and the subconscious, unless you're going to tell me that "teh" is a freudian slip. You'd know that if you'd have actually studied psychology past the 101 level.

I won't hold it against you either.


It's called context. Teh is a meaningless word. Scared/Sacred are both meaningful especially within your post. The first example of a typo could not be considered a slip, the latter could. See the differenece yet? But, you always do compare apples to oranges and expect people to think you have some sort of valid argument; why should you change now?

P.S.
I took 2 300 level and 2 400 level psych courses on top of studying Freud and Jung in my analytical philosphy of the mind 500 (grad level) course. I'm no expert, but I sure as shit have more of a command on the subject than you and wikipedia.
Fotex group-says 'Behold! penis!'

Kifle puts on his robe and wizard hat.

Thalidyrr tells you 'Yeah, you know, getting it like a jackhammer wears you out.'

Teflor "You can beat a tank with a shovel!!1!1!!one!!1!uno!!"
Ragorn
Sojourner
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby Ragorn » Tue Apr 22, 2008 4:51 pm

Adriorn Darkcloak wrote:Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that's what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve.

The bar owner, being a Republican, suggested that the ninth and tenth men were paying too much for their beer, so he took them aside and told them that he would cut five bucks off their bar tabs.

And so:

The first four men (the poorest) paid nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $13.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $54.

And everything was great. The first eight men were happy because they weren't paying much for their beer. The ninth and tenth men were happy because the bar owner cut them a break. Everything was fine until six months later, when the bar owner came to the group.

"Sorry guys," he said. "I know we had an arrangement. But after I started giving two of you a discount... well... I'm not making money on the bar and I'm sinking into debt. So unfortunately, I'm going to have to charge you each an extra dollar."

The first four men said "We don't have a dollar to give you."
The ninth man said "I already pay more than most of these guys, why are you charging me extra?"
The tenth man said "Look, I pay you $54 a day to drink here. If you charge me an extra dollar, I'll take my money elsewhere."

The fifth through eighth men looked at each other and shrugged. They each took an extra dollar out of their wallet and gave it to the bar owner.

Six months later, the bar closed.
- Ragorn
Shar: Leave the moaning to the people who have real issues to moan about like rangers or newbies.
Corth: Go ask out a chick that doesn't wiggle her poon in people's faces for a living.
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby Corth » Tue Apr 22, 2008 5:50 pm

I don't get it.. :)
Having said all that, the situation has been handled, so this thread is pretty much at an end. -Kossuth



Goddamned slippery mage.
Ragorn
Sojourner
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby Ragorn » Tue Apr 22, 2008 6:25 pm

Corth wrote:I don't get it.. :)

Of course not, you're the ninth man ;)
- Ragorn
Shar: Leave the moaning to the people who have real issues to moan about like rangers or newbies.
Corth: Go ask out a chick that doesn't wiggle her poon in people's faces for a living.
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby Corth » Wed Apr 23, 2008 12:02 am

uh-huh
Having said all that, the situation has been handled, so this thread is pretty much at an end. -Kossuth



Goddamned slippery mage.
teflor the ranger
Sojourner
Posts: 3923
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Waterdeep

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby teflor the ranger » Wed Apr 23, 2008 1:16 am

Kifle wrote:
teflor the ranger wrote:I did. Typoes are common enough that it's not unusual that they're disconnected entirely with thoughts and the subconscious, unless you're going to tell me that "teh" is a freudian slip. You'd know that if you'd have actually studied psychology past the 101 level.

I won't hold it against you either.


It's called context. Teh is a meaningless word. Scared/Sacred are both meaningful especially within your post. The first example of a typo could not be considered a slip, the latter could. See the differenece yet? But, you always do compare apples to oranges and expect people to think you have some sort of valid argument; why should you change now?

P.S.
I took 2 300 level and 2 400 level psych courses on top of studying Freud and Jung in my analytical philosphy of the mind 500 (grad level) course. I'm no expert, but I sure as shit have more of a command on the subject than you and wikipedia.


Do you want to explain how Sacred has any meaning in my post? You've utterly failed to do so, so far.
Teflor does. Teflor does not.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby Sarvis » Wed Apr 23, 2008 2:53 am

The complete phrase was: "Republicans are always sacred "

Deifying Republicans seems to have meaning to me...
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
teflor the ranger
Sojourner
Posts: 3923
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Waterdeep

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby teflor the ranger » Wed Apr 23, 2008 4:02 am

edit: no satisfaction for you. read next post.
Last edited by teflor the ranger on Wed Apr 23, 2008 4:27 am, edited 1 time in total.
Teflor does. Teflor does not.
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby Corth » Wed Apr 23, 2008 4:19 am

Heh, Teflor..

As much as I hate to say it, I think you will soon find that Sarvis outwitted you on that one.
Having said all that, the situation has been handled, so this thread is pretty much at an end. -Kossuth



Goddamned slippery mage.
teflor the ranger
Sojourner
Posts: 3923
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Waterdeep

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby teflor the ranger » Wed Apr 23, 2008 4:25 am

Yeah, I totally misread what he said. I need to go to bed. Learn to read! Self.
Teflor does. Teflor does not.
Kifle
Sojourner
Posts: 3830
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Huntington, IN USA
Contact:

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby Kifle » Wed Apr 23, 2008 9:22 am

This post was made by teflor the ranger who is currently on your ignore list. Display this post.


I love the new message board.
Fotex group-says 'Behold! penis!'

Kifle puts on his robe and wizard hat.

Thalidyrr tells you 'Yeah, you know, getting it like a jackhammer wears you out.'

Teflor "You can beat a tank with a shovel!!1!1!!one!!1!uno!!"
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby Sarvis » Wed Apr 23, 2008 12:23 pm

teflor the ranger wrote:edit: no satisfaction for you. read next post.



Oh I don't know, I found Corth's post very satisfying. :P
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
teflor the ranger
Sojourner
Posts: 3923
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Waterdeep

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby teflor the ranger » Wed Apr 23, 2008 9:35 pm

Sarvis wrote:
teflor the ranger wrote:edit: no satisfaction for you. read next post.



Oh I don't know, I found Corth's post very satisfying. :P


I told you he was that gullible, Corth. Btw, don't you think you took my quote a bit out of context? It is followed by "of Democrats."
Teflor does. Teflor does not.
teflor the ranger
Sojourner
Posts: 3923
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Waterdeep

Re: An Inconvenient Truth

Postby teflor the ranger » Wed Apr 23, 2008 9:40 pm

Kifle wrote:
This post was made by teflor the ranger who is currently on your ignore list. Display this post.


I love the new message board.


Ah, the crutch of technology. Helping the intellectually disabled since 1996. Ignore him by myself? My ego has extra sensitive skin!

I too love the new message board. Get off my lawn!
Teflor does. Teflor does not.

Return to “T2 General Discussion Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest